Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^ This is basically what I am saying...yes the amenities as far as proximity to entertainment can be nice (especially professional sports/concerts), but realistically, how many of these types of events do you go to a year? Myself, even when in the city maybe went to 1 concert and a couple baseball/hockey games; 3-5 events per year...Now I'm sure others go more often, and I suspect quite a few go even less. So is this really a reason to choose a place to live, just so you can avoid a 30-45 minute drive to see a concert/game every few months? Now, living in the burbs, I've already been to 3 concerts just this summer, because it only takes around 25 minutes to get there, and the parking is plentiful and easy. Not to mention the atmosphere on an outdoor lawn concert in the summertime beats an indoor amphitheater any day of the week in my opinion..
I know people who see concerts around three times a month. If you don't think there are people out there who take full advantage of living in a city, then you don't know enough people. Yes, "most" people aren't doing city activities multiple times a week, but most people don't live in cities anyway. More people live in suburbs than in cities, but there's nothing wrong with a minority of people seeking a different type of lifestyle.
Now, living in the burbs, I've already been to 3 concerts just this summer, because it only takes around 25 minutes to get there, and the parking is plentiful and easy. Not to mention the atmosphere on an outdoor lawn concert in the summertime beats an indoor amphitheater any day of the week in my opinion..
In cities every major park has free summer concerts, movie nights, etc. and there are no parking hassles. The idea of having to drive to go out is absurd to me. It would mean no drinking, wasting time, gas and money parking, etc.
When parking is "plentiful and easy" it means land has little value. The parking is free because it isn't a valued location.
^ This is basically what I am saying...yes the amenities as far as proximity to entertainment can be nice (especially professional sports/concerts), but realistically, how many of these types of events do you go to a year? Myself, even when in the city maybe went to 1 concert and a couple baseball/hockey games; 3-5 events per year...Now I'm sure others go more often, and I suspect quite a few go even less. So is this really a reason to choose a place to live, just so you can avoid a 30-45 minute drive to see a concert/game every few months? Now, living in the burbs, I've already been to 3 concerts just this summer, because it only takes around 25 minutes to get there, and the parking is plentiful and easy. Not to mention the atmosphere on an outdoor lawn concert in the summertime beats an indoor amphitheater any day of the week in my opinion..
Not just concerts and ball games. Think block parties, food truck gatherings, festivals, parades, neighborhood bars, clubs, events at the local park, marathons/races, the arts, etc. All within walking distance. Have some imagination-the city has endless things to do.
If anything, this illustrates how different the suburbs are vs urban living in terms of activities. You can't think of activities besides sports games and hockey games because as a suburbanite you don't have much reason to go into the city besides for those events. You don't even realize how many things there are to do in an urban setting, as you aren't as familiar with the area. That really speaks to how much an urban neighborhood offers vs the isolating nature of suburbs. Not a knock against you, just an observation.
Job opportunities for the most part. It is a shame because I feel more opportunities should be allowed in many other cities/towns too. Cities can be horrible places to live and travel within, add to that the vehicle congestion and filthy environment it's not good for a person's health. Not much can be done at the moment though because big cities have established themselves as the epicentres for jobs and pay.
It's not a matter of whether they're allowed, it's economics. Companies are more likely to find the talent they need from bigger pools of people. There's no magic on/off button for dispersing jobs to the countryside.
From a practical standpoint: More so now than in recent history, it's harder and harder to make a decent living in rural locations. This is the result of all kinds of forces, from corporate farming to NAFTA and the former manufacturing economies being shipped to Central America or overseas to Asia. Sometimes the ones left behind are stereotyped as underachievers (and sometimes they are), but at the same time, rural and small town USA needs some fresh ideas, which is impossible if everyone is moving on. We're already divided enough as it is between rural and urban/suburban, so there's definitely some value in not having all the innovation come from trendy big cities or affluent suburbs and exacerbate the brain drain.
From a personality/stage of life standpoint:: Younger people (as a whole- this doesn't apply to everyone) are prone to have a certain wanderlust and get bored in their hometown. How many times has someone who reaches the age that they become more independent said "I can't wait to get out of my boring hometown"? Sometimes to only come back years later when the big city becomes tiresome and monotonous in its own way.
Also, I have a personal observation that is admittedly based on my observations, but I feel its an educated observation.
I've noticed that there is a certain personality type that is insistent on moving to "top tier cities" (i.e. NY, LA, SF, DC, other major cities abroad) versus the young person in rural Iowa who goes to the big city of Des Moines, or stays in their hometowns with the intent of making their native corner of the world a better place. The Top Tier crowd tends to be talented and creative (which is an almost must not to be pushed out of these uber competitive environments). The downside is they are often high-maintenance (needing to be coddled every moment with high profile entertainment and stimulation) and a bit flaky and self-centered when it comes to hopping from one gig to another (in both their professional life and personal live).
Do you guys think it is obviously easier to save when living in a smaller town? Cheaper everything for the most part vs a city (especially the one I live in) where rents/housing prices, transport, etc are all more expensive?
Do you guys think it is obviously easier to save when living in a smaller town? Cheaper everything for the most part vs a city (especially the one I live in) where rents/housing prices, transport, etc are all more expensive?
Not really. You're potential to make more thus saving more is higher when there is a larger and more demanding job market, and of course there are the variables like a field engineer in a gas field in some remote location. You are also have the ability to network and have opportunities come to you that you wouldn't in a lot of smaller locations.
Not really. You're potential to make more thus saving more is higher when there is a larger and more demanding job market, and of course there are the variables like a field engineer in a gas field in some remote location. You are also have the ability to network and have opportunities come to you that you wouldn't in a lot of smaller locations.
True, and think of those jobs such as physicians, lawyers, etc whose salaries likely even go higher! I think I can agree with jobs in general paying more in bigger cities, but some jobs like the ones I mentioned with have a higher demand and pay more in the smaller areas!
Supply and demand!
So again, I think lots of jobs have potential to make more in the smaller cities and you could possibly save more also (or take trips to cities over the wknd).
Do you guys think it is obviously easier to save when living in a smaller town? Cheaper everything for the most part vs a city (especially the one I live in) where rents/housing prices, transport, etc are all more expensive?
This would come down to too many different factors:
-Whether or not you own a car/need one to get to work (City would probably have the advantage here)
-Where you would be paid more (Most likely the city, but there are exceptions)
-Whether you buy or rent, and the taxes paid if buying (Property taxes tend to be lower in rural areas)
-The cost to buy or rent (City loses here for sure, at least in the nicer parts)
I would say your assumption is correct only if you are able to get a comparable job in terms of salary in the smaller town vs a larger city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
